Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 61993 

(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–54–0081, 

dated August 11, 1993. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness 

Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice 

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; 

telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 

93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@

airbus.com; Internet http://www.airbus.com. 

You may view this service information at the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

25, 2016. 

John P. Piccola, Jr., 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–21283 Filed 9–7–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–5814; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–247–AD; Amendment 

39–18639; AD 2016–18–09] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Airbus Model A318, A319, and A320 

series airplanes. This AD was prompted 

by reports of chafing damage on the 

fuselage skin at the bottom of certain 

frames, underneath the fairing structure. 

This AD requires repetitive detailed 

inspections for damage on the fuselage 

skin at certain frames, and applicable 

related investigative and corrective 

actions. We are issuing this AD to detect 

and correct damage to the fuselage skin, 

which could lead to crack initiation and 

propagation, possibly resulting in 

reduced structural integrity of the 

fuselage. 

DATES: This AD is effective October 13, 

2016. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of October 13, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact 

Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 1 

Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 

Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 

61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email 

account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. You 

may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. It is also 

available on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

5814. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

5814; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Office (telephone 800–647– 

5527) is Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1405; 

fax 425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to certain Airbus Model A318, 

A319, and A320 series airplanes. The 

NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on November 27, 2015 (80 FR 

74045) (‘‘the NPRM’’). 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA AD 2014–0259, 

dated December 5, 2014 (referred to 

after this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for certain Airbus Model A318, A319, 

and A320 series airplanes. The MCAI 

states: 

An operator reported finding chafing 

damage on the fuselage skin at the bottom of 

frame (FR) 34 junction between stringer 

(STR) 43 left hand (LH) side and right hand 

(RH) side on several aeroplanes, underneath 

the fairing structure. 

After investigation, a contact between the 

fairing nut plate and the fuselage was 

identified, causing damage to the fuselage. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could lead to crack initiation and 

propagation, possibly resulting in reduced 

structural integrity of the fuselage. 

For the reason described above, this 

[EASA] AD requires repetitive detailed 

inspections (DET) of the fuselage [for chafing] 

at FR 34 and provides an optional 

terminating action [modification of the belly 

fairing] to the repetitive inspections required 

by this [EASA] AD. 

Related investigative actions include a 

special detailed inspection of external 

fuselage skin panel for any cracking, 

and measurement of crack length and 

remaining thickness. Corrective actions 

include repair or modification of the 

fuselage skin panel. You may examine 

the MCAI in the AD docket on the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov 

by searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2015–5814. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the NPRM and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Request To Use Latest Service 

Information 

Airbus requested that we revise 

paragraph (i) of the NPRM to add Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–53–1281, 

Revision 02, including Appendix 01, 

dated October 9, 2015. 

United Airlines also requested that we 

revise paragraph (i) of the NPRM to add 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1281, 

Revision 02, including Appendix 01, 

dated October 9, 2015, and provide 

credit for Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 

53–1281, Revision 01, dated December 

1, 2014. United Airlines explained that 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1281, 

Revision 02, including Appendix 01, 

dated October 9, 2015, includes 

numerous configuration additions. 

For the reasons stated by the 

commenter, we agree to revise this AD 

to include Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–53–1281, Revision 02, including 

Appendix 01, dated October 9, 2015. 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1281, 

Revision 02, including Appendix 01, 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
61994 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

dated October 9, 2015, includes, among 

other things, configuration changes, new 

configurations, and revision of the 

Manufacturer Serial Numbers (MSNs), 

but adds no new actions. We also 

included Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 

53–1281, Revision 01, dated December 

1, 2014, in paragraph (j) of this AD, as 

credit for certain actions performed 

before the effective date of this AD. 

Request To Allow Use of Any AirbusApproved Corrective Action 

Airbus requested that we revise the 

NPRM to add a paragraph that allows 

for any corrective action provided by 

Airbus. Airbus stated that in case of 

deviation during service information 

embodiment, the only solution to cover 

the deviation for the customer is to ask 

for an alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC). Airbus included the following 

example, which allows any corrective 

action provided by Airbus: 

If, during modification of an aeroplane as 

required by paragraph (1) of this AD, a 

difference (see Note) is detected which makes 

the accomplishment of a part of the 

modification instructions impossible, before 

next flight, contact Airbus for approved 

instructions and accomplish those 

instructions accordingly, including follow-on 

action(s), as applicable. 

Note: For the purpose of this AD, the 

detected difference can be either: 

(a) a necessary design deviation due to 

production related concessions that directly 

affect the sensitive area of the modification; 

(b) an obvious typographical error in the 

SB instructions; or 

(c) an aircraft configuration not (yet) 

included in/addressed by the SB 

instructions. 

We disagree to add a paragraph that 

allows for any corrective action 

provided by Airbus, because CFR 39.19 

requires approval of an AMOC for an 

alternative method to mitigate the risk 

associated with the unsafe condition 

addressed in an AD. The FAA uses its 

discretion in determining actions within 

the provision of an AMOC. We have 

made no changes to this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Clarify Steps Required for 

Compliance 

United Airlines requested that we 

revise the NPRM to clarify that the 

actions that are required for compliance 

(RC) are limited to the steps in 

paragraphs 3.C. and 3.D. of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–53–1287, dated 

July 29, 2014; Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–53–1281, Revision 02, including 

Appendix 01, dated October 9, 2015; 

and Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53– 

1281, Revision 01, dated December 1, 

2014. The commenter noted that 

paragraph 3.D. contains no test 

requirements. 

We agree with the request, although, 

as the commenter noted, paragraph 3.D. 

of the referenced service information 

does not include any test requirements. 

We have therefore revised paragraphs 

(g) and (i) of this AD to limit the 

requirements to paragraph 3.C., 

‘‘Procedure,’’ of the service information. 

Request for Clarification of Compliance 

Methods and Intervals 

United Airlines requested that we 

clarify whether the inspections 

specified in the NPRM and Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–53–1287, dated 

July 29, 2014, override the inspection 

methods and intervals defined in 

structures repair manual (SRM) 53–21– 

11 PB 101, and whether the terminating 

action in paragraph (i) of the proposed 

AD terminates the inspections in SRM 

53–21–11 PB 101 following rework. The 

commenter stated that SRM 53–21–11 

PB 101 defines different inspection 

methods, threshold, and repetitive 

intervals. 

We agree that clarification is 

necessary. We recognize that there may 

be a conflict between the inspections 

specified in this AD and SRM 53–21–11 

PB 101. The requirements of this AD 

were developed to address a known 

unsafe condition and prevail over the 

actions of previously developed service 

information provided by a 

manufacturer. We have made no 

changes to this AD in this regard. 

Request for Clarification of Limit 

United Airlines requested that we 

revise paragraph (g)(3) of the proposed 

AD to clarify the ‘‘limits’’ of detected 

damage. Paragraph (g)(3) of the 

proposed AD refers to damage that 

exceeds the limits defined in Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–53–1287, dated 

July 29, 2014. United Airlines noted that 

this limit relates to the remaining skin 

thickness as defined by SRM 53–21–11 

PB 101, but the meaning of ‘‘remaining 

thickness out of limits’’ is inconclusive. 

United Airlines stated that the 

remaining skin thickness following a 

blend out could become a Category ‘B’ 

repair with subsequent inspections or a 

Category ‘C’ repair, eventually requiring 

doubler repair. United Airlines stated 

that Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53– 

1287, dated July 29, 2014, does not give 

instructions to accomplish a doubler 

repair if the remaining thickness is 

within SRM 53–21–11 PB 101 limits. 

United Airlines stated that it would not 

be wise to install an external doubler 

(unless necessary) if the remaining skin 

thickness is ‘‘within limits.’’ The 

commenter therefore proposed that we 

clarify the ‘‘limit’’ as an allowable 

rework (blend out) that does not require 

repair (doubler installation). 

We agree that clarification is 

necessary. If Subtask 531287–832–002– 

001 of Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 

53–1287, dated July 29, 2014, is 

performed, and no crack is found, and 

the measurement of the remaining 

thickness of fuselage skin exceeds 

certain limits, then Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–53–1287, dated July 29, 

2014, specifies contacting Airbus for 

repair instructions. The corresponding 

requirement in paragraph (g)(3) of this 

AD, requires that those repairs be done 

using a method approved by the FAA, 

EASA, or Airbus’s EASA Design 

Organization Approval. Repair 

instructions are established based on the 

inspection results shared with Airbus, 

which may vary on a case-by-case basis. 

We have made no changes to this final 

rule in this regard. 

Request for Inclusion of Previously 

Repaired Area in Inspection 

United Airlines requested that we 

revise paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed 

AD to include damage on the ‘‘fuselage 

skin or skin repair (if present)’’ for the 

required detailed inspection. United 

Airlines explained that it experienced 

several issues of skin chafing prior to 

the release of Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–53–1287, dated July 29, 2014; as 

a result, some airplanes have needed 

doubler repairs due to skin wear beyond 

remaining thickness allowed. The 

commenter stated that because repairs 

may be present, it will not be possible 

to inspect the skin in the chafing area. 

For the reasons stated by the 

commenter, we agree to include 

previously repaired areas for the 

inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) 

of this AD. We have revised paragraph 

(g)(1) of this AD accordingly. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting this AD 

with the changes described previously 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM for 

correcting the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM. 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of this AD. 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 61995 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–53–1281, Revision 02, including 

Appendix 01, dated October 9, 2015; 

and Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53– 

1287, dated July 29, 2014. The service 

information describes procedures for a 

detailed inspection for damage 

(including chafing marks) on the 

fuselage skin at FR 34 between STR 43 

LH and RH sides, and applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions. 

This service information is reasonably 

available because the interested parties 

have access to it through their normal 

course of business or by the means 

identified in the ADDRESSES section. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 642 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 12 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this AD. The average labor rate is $85 

per work-hour. Required parts would 

cost about $90 per product. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of 

this AD on U.S. operators to be 

$712,620, or $1,110 per product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions would take 

about 21 work-hours and require parts 

costing $3,550, for a cost of $5,335 per 

product. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need this action. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska; and 

4. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

AD 2016–18–09 Airbus: Amendment 39– 

18639; Docket No. FAA–2015–5814; 

Directorate Identifier 2014–NM–247–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective October 13, 2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the airplanes identified 

in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this 

AD, certificated in any category, all 

manufacturer serial numbers, except those on 

which Airbus Modification 37878 has been 

embodied in production, or Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–53–1281 has been done in 

service. 

(1) Airbus Model A318–111, –112, –121, 

and –122 airplanes. 

(2) Airbus Model A319–111, –112, –113, 

–114, –115, –131, –132, and –133 airplanes. 

(3) Airbus Model A320–211, –212, –214, 

–231, –232, and –233 airplanes. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

chafing damage on the fuselage skin at the 

bottom of certain frames, underneath the 

fairing structure. We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct damage to the fuselage 

skin, which could lead to crack initiation and 

propagation, possibly resulting in reduced 

structural integrity of the fuselage. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspection and Corrective 

Action 

(1) Within the compliance times identified 

in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this 

AD, whichever occurs later, do a detailed 

inspection for damage (including chafing 

marks) on the fuselage skin, including 

previously repaired areas, at frame (FR) 34 

between stringer (STR) 43 on the left-hand 

and right-hand sides, in accordance with 

paragraph 3.C., ‘‘Procedure,’’ of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–53–1287, dated July 

29, 2014. Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 12,000 flight cycles or 

24,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first. 

(i) Before exceeding 12,000 flight cycles or 

24,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first 

since the airplane’s first flight. 

(ii) Within 5,000 flight cycles or 10,000 

flight hours, whichever occurs first after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(2) If any damage is detected during any 

inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of 

this AD, before further flight, do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–53–1287, dated July 

29, 2014, except as required by paragraph 

(g)(3) of this AD. 

(3) If any cracking is found during any 

related investigative action required by 

paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, or if any damage 

detected during the inspection required by 

paragraph (g)(1) of this AD exceeds the limits 

defined in the Accomplishment Instructions 

of Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1287, 

dated July 29, 2014, before further flight, 

repair using a method approved by the 

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the 

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or 

Airbus’s EASA Design Organization 

Approval (DOA). 

(h) Non-Terminating Repair Action 

Accomplishment of a repair on an airplane 

as required by paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of 

this AD, does not constitute terminating 

action for the repetitive detailed inspections 

required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, 

unless the approved repair indicates 

otherwise. 

(i) Terminating Action for the Repetitive 

Detailed Inspections 

Modification of the belly fairing on any 

airplane in accordance with paragraph 3.C., 

‘‘Procedure,’’ of Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–53–1281, Revision 02, including 

Appendix 01, dated October 9, 2015, 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
61996 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

constitutes terminating action for the 

repetitive detailed inspections required by 

paragraph (g)(1) of this AD for that airplane. 

(j) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for actions 

required by paragraph (i) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–53–1281, dated July 29, 2014; or 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1281, 

Revision 01, dated December 1, 2014. This 

service information is not incorporated by 

reference in this AD. 

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 

request to your principal inspector or local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–1405; fax 425–227–1149. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116- 

AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using 

any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate 

principal inspector, or lacking a principal 

inspector, the manager of the local flight 

standards district office/certificate holding 

district office. The AMOC approval letter 

must specifically reference this AD. 

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer, the action must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 

116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or 

the EASA; or Airbus’s EASA DOA. If 

approved by the DOA, the approval must 

include the DOA-authorized signature. 

(3) Required for Compliance (RC): If any 

service information contains procedures or 

tests that are identified as RC, those 

procedures and tests must be done to comply 

with this AD; any procedures or tests that are 

not identified as RC are recommended. Those 

procedures and tests that are not identified 

as RC may be deviated from using accepted 

methods in accordance with the operator’s 

maintenance or inspection program without 

obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided 

the procedures and tests identified as RC can 

be done and the airplane can be put back in 

an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or 

changes to procedures or tests identified as 

RC require approval of an AMOC. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2014–0259, dated 

December 5, 2014, for related information. 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov 

by searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2015–5814. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference is 

available at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this AD. 

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1281, 

Revision 02, including Appendix 01, dated 

October 9, 2015. 

(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1287, 

dated July 29, 2014. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness 

Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice 

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; 

telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 

93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@

airbus.com; Internet http://www.airbus.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

24, 2016. 

John P. Piccola, Jr., 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–21144 Filed 9–7–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–6668; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–149–AD; Amendment 

39–18627; AD 2016–17–14] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, 

Saab Aeronautics (Type Certificate 

Previously Held by Saab AB, Saab 

Aerosystems) Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model 

SAAB 2000 airplanes. This AD was 

prompted by a report that on some 

airplanes, during the paint removal 

process for repainting the airplane, the 

basic corrosion protection (anodizing 

and primer) coating was sanded down 

to bare metal on the aluminum skin 

panels, and the bare metal might not 

have been treated correctly for corrosion 

prevention. This AD requires an 

inspection of structural components of 

the airplane for any damaged protective 

coating; inspections of those areas for 

pitting corrosion, if necessary; a 

thickness measurement to determine if 

there is reduced skin thickness, if 

necessary; and repair, if necessary. We 

are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

damaged protective coatings. This 

condition could result in pitting 

corrosion damage; and reduced metal 

thickness, which could result in 

reduced static and fatigue strength of 

the airplane’s structural parts. 

DATES: This AD is effective October 13, 

2016. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of October 13, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact Saab 

AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE–581 88, 

Linko ̈ping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 

18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email 

saab2000.techsupport@saabgroup.com; 

Internet http://www.saabgroup.com. 

You may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. It is also 

available on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

6668. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

6668; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Office (telephone 800–647– 

5527) is Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES